Bexley Home Care

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We identified one breach of the legal regulations. The registered manager was on leave at the time of the inspection, the service was currently being managed by two directors, and a field supervisor. Monitoring systems in place did not always ensure that there was effective oversight of the service to assess and monitor the care provided. Audits were not always undertaken. Records were not always in place to demonstrate that feedback from people was acted upon. The provider was supporting people with learning disabilities, mental health conditions and substances misuse problems. However, the provider had not registered with CQC to support people within these service user bands. Staff told us they supported by management and felt confident about speaking up at work.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The service had a management structure in place and staff spoke positively about managers. Staff were kept informed of changes within the service through regular communication which included staff meetings and daily logs. A staff member said, “Managers do a good job.” Another staff member said, “Managers – really good, approachable and supportive.”

The current systems in place were not robust enough to assess, monitor and improve the quality of service being provided to people. This placed people at risk of harm and receiving care and support which was not appropriate to their needs. We found improvements were needed in relation risk management plans, medicines management, recruitment records, call monitoring, staff training, consent to care and person-centred care. We found audits were not in place for care plans, risk management, call monitoring and recruitment. The provider sought feedback from people and relatives, however, there were no action plan in place to demonstrate that the provider had acted on addressing and following up on the shortfalls identified from their feedback.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.